That is not what your OP claimed. Your claim, which was not supported by the USA Today article, was that:
‘Iraqi forces have been fully responsible for more than 40% of the missions being run, and have participated in another 35% or so.’
Care to provide the cite for that claim? Care to address any points raised in this thread?
Care to just admit you’re a semi-literate basement dwelling clod one just one hangnail short of losing your grip on reality all-together?
How about comments from a local Houston radio show host who was making his second trip to Iraq? He got out in the boonies with the troops and got the straight dope from the people who are making it happen. Here’s one entry in his online report.
Actually, my rebuttal was orders of magnitude better than ignorant horseshit like I quoted from your post. I just love it when folks like you post crap like that. All you are doing is confirming that I am right; you resort to that kind of childish nonsense because you haven’t got anything else to fall back on.
I won’t argue that the Cheney shooting story has more mouthbreather attraction than a story that involves people thinking. However, the shooting incident happened on Saturday and was reported to the press on Sunday. The press conference in Iraq happened on Friday. I question why nothing was reported from the press conference until yesterday.
There was no coverup. And frankly, the most scandalous thing is that the lawyer survived. You just can’t get rid of them…
Wow. Forty percent you say? Well, I guess I just have to believe it. Because this administration hasn’t lied about this exact same thing before…
Nothing in that blog supports what you claim. I see no ‘40%’ or ‘35%’ embedded quotes. Have you ever considered, just as a wild-ass left-field suggestion, actually reading your cites? A wacky idea, but who knows, it just may be crazy ehough to pay off.
Anyway - i’m sure we can all share in your joy that the USA’s efforts to train the militia’s who comprise the Iraq Army to have at each other more effectively is finally paying off.
As for matching quality of rebuttals, i’m afraid you couldn’t take my cat on the best day you ever had, let alone me.
I do have to admire your dogged, ‘maybe this time it won’t hurt when I slam my forehead into this wall’ stupidity though. It’s ‘special’, in all senses of the word I’m beginning to suspect.
[Pubblie bullshitter]
It’s not the blowjob that bothers me. It’s the lie!
[/Pubbie bullshitter]
Of course, Cheneny ONLY fired a gun into a man’s face. Clinton fired his weiner into Monica’s face.
Everyone knows that Cheney’s shooting is protected by the Second Amendment. Clinton’s shooting isn’t protected by any amendments!
-Joe
I mean - who among us can honestly say they HAVEN’T been shot in the face by the VP of the USA?
But Bushbot’s claiming they can see light at the end of the tunnel are about as common as Ice Ages and therefore demand the full and complete attention of the world’s media.
Exactimundo. We’ve been hearing happy talk about how we’d trained 100,000+ Iraqi security forces at intervals since the fall of 2003, and each time, the numbers turn out to be hollow.
I’m not saying that Shi’ite militia in Iraqi uniforms aren’t doing patrols in Najaf and Basra, where they’re simply ensuring that their own people obey Islamic law. Or that peshmerga in Iraqi uniforms aren’t patrolling Kurd-controlled northern Iraq. But that all means zilch in terms of putting down the insurgency.
I’ll believe the Iraqi troops are actually taking the load off our troops when our troop count over there drops under 100,000 without things getting appreciably worse.
Yup, whenever I want to know what’s really happening in Iraq, I check out what Houston talk radio hosts are saying.
It’s like a flashback to David Janssen in The Green Berets.
Clothahump, how can you possibly ask this last question, given the links you’ve been provided in this thread? Do you even do the most basic googles before posting threads like this?
Daniel
And the USA Today report is from 14th Feb. Days after the as yet still uncited by Clot alleged press conference.
I wonder why these American hating bastards waited so long to spread the Good News? I sure hope Clotty is going to tear them a new asshole for their slothness.
I just heard a snippet from the High Hillbilly Heroin Addict Himself, and it turns out the real crime here is the media hounding the story, rather than the media letting the Bushies compose themselves so that they can give cogent responses.
I figure Clothahummer, having now been told what to think, will be in here to clear things up in just a minute.
-Joe
I am not going to argue much with you.
It is good to see you come back and defend your point without waiting for an extended period.
My news Source is typically NPR (which I think you would defined as left-wing, I just define as thorough). They covered the conference you are speaking of Friday Evening.
The Cheney shooting is really a huge story. Just the fact that it can be played up as the first time a VP has shot someone it 200 years. The Late Night fodder it provides is incredible.
I don’t know when the Cable Networks got around to covering the conference but “Cheney’s got a Gun” (Daily Show 2-13-6) is a lead story for a week.
Jim
Somehow, “Bush’s Stooges Put Positive Spin on Iraq” isn’t exactly newsworthy. When they announce that Iraqi troops can now handle everything as the US can get out, THAT would be news. But having someone merely cite an unproveable percentage doesn’t make the presses stop the way having a vice president put lead into his buddy does.
Clothahump
By your own admission you are saying this story (the Cheney shooting) has more “mouthbreather appeal” than a hard news story. So then I think you’d agree that the media doesn’t have a liberal bias as much as it has a sensational, titilating, scandalous bias. What’s that newsroom axiom ? “If it bleeds, it leads.”
The media has never reported much at all in the way of anything going well in Iraq even when the story was new, and there was no attempt to cover anything up. Media bias against both this administration and Republicans in general is precisely why precious little good about Iraq has ever been reported and why this feeding frenzy is going on.
Good on ya, humpster!
P.S.: Some Democrat party bigwig on t.v. the other night (sorry, the name escapes me – a heavyset guy dressed all in black, with t.v. preacher hair) readily acknowledged that he had never seen – “even in a roomful of Nobel prize winners” – a more self-important group of people than the current White House press corp. They are simply pissed that they got scooped on the story and are trying to “cover up” the real motive for their behavior by alleging a cover up on the part of the admistration.
Hey, we’re going to be turning the corner in Iraq any day now. The insurgency is in the last of its last throes. They’ll be standing up so we can stand down.
The problem here is that most people recognize in short order when somebody is pissing on them and telling them it is raining. Some other people, well, they sing and splash in the gutters and dance around the lampposts. They raise their faces to the heavens and let the “rain” flow over their glowing faces. These days, the latter folks are inevitably republican.
And by the same token it is nearly 30%. How 'bout we stick to “it is what it is?”
How do you spin this to be the fault of the media?
I certainly hope that Republican senators have better sources of information than the news media. When THEY can’t swallow what Bush is selling, how is that the media’s fault?